1 / 35

CONREPNET A project 50% funded by the EU

CONREPNET A project 50% funded by the EU. Partners: BRE, UK Gifford, UK CT Koulutos , Finland Freyssinet , France BBRI, Belgium IETcc , Spain STU-K, Czech Republic. PERFORMANCE OF REPAIRS IN PRACTICE. Proforma : Simple layout on one side of A4 Non-attributable Mostly tick boxes

lydie
Download Presentation

CONREPNET A project 50% funded by the EU

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. CONREPNETA project 50% funded by the EU Partners: BRE, UK Gifford, UK CT Koulutos, Finland Freyssinet, France BBRI, Belgium IETcc, Spain STU-K, Czech Republic

  2. PERFORMANCE OF REPAIRS IN PRACTICE Proforma: Simple layout on one side of A4 Non-attributable Mostly tick boxes Up to 40 data points per response 45 % response

  3. Distribution of Respondents230 (247) case histories‘Consultants rarely involved subsequently’

  4. Distribution of geographic locations

  5. Distribution of Environments

  6. THE STRUCTURES

  7. Distribution of Case-histories by Structure(Numbers in brackets)

  8. Ages of Structures

  9. Ages of Structures when Repaired

  10. Primary Causes of Original Deterioration

  11. THE REPAIRS

  12. TYPES OF REPAIR

  13. Relative uses of different patch materials 60% cementitious 30% polymer modified 10% other (fibre reinforced etc)

  14. Relative uses of different types of coatings

  15. Classification of Performance As seen at last inspection: Successful Evidence of deterioration Failure

  16. Performance of repairs in relation to deterioration

  17. Performance of repairs in relation to time

  18. Performances of Patches

  19. Added Value of Coating

  20. Patch repair after 5 years

  21. Frost damaged underpass repaired with a sprayed polymer coating

  22. Cathodic Protection 74 Installations, most UK • 46 wholly successful • 13 needed attention • 15 failed

  23. Cathodic Protection Accidentally switched off Phone lines vandalised Control box fire Control failure Anode failure Unsuitable application

  24. Modes of Failure – All Types of Repair

  25. COMMENTS ‘Partially wrong design of repair, partially wrong option of repair material, partially wrong design of concrete surface’ Poor workmanship : ‘the work had been a textbook example of how not to carry out a repair’. ‘coatings were incorrectly applied despite clear instructions being given’ ‘the strength of the repair material was considerably greater than the substrate’ ‘poor workmanship; too thin coating (against instructions)’ and there were other instances where coatings were applied too thick or too thin.

  26. Failure of Polymer Mortar Patches and Sprayed Polymer Coatings on an AAR Affected Bridge. Considered partly due to incorrect diagnosis of the original problem and partly to incorrect design of the repair.

  27. Failure of Polymer Mortar Patches and Polymer Coating Applied to Corroded Reinforcement. Considered due partly to incorrect design of the repair and partly to incorrect application of anti-corrosion treatment to corroded reinforcement.

  28. Key Points • Performances of 230 concrete repairs have been collected and analysed • Ages of structures when repaired were mainly in the range 10 to 40 years, the oldest was 100 years • The most common problem was corrosion • 60 per cent of repairs involved patching • .

  29. Key Points contd • 50 per cent of the repairs had failed • 20 per cent failed in 5 years • 55 percent failed in 10 years • 90 per cent failed in 25 years • Cracking, debonding and continued corrosion were the most common modes of failure • Incorrect design of the repair, poor workmanship and wrong diagnosis were the most common causes of failure.

  30. CURRENT REPAIR PRACTICE

  31. INSPECTION Visual methods are used in the majority of inspections. 20 to 30 per cent of inspection work is subcontracted The most commonly used methods of NDT are measurements of depth of cover, carbonation and chloride content. Some small repair works may start without any inspection

  32. Repair Methods Comment: ‘…sometimes had to apply a repair method specified by an owner or consultant while (we) would have proposed and used a more appropriate method if the choice had been up to (us)…’.

  33. QUALITY CONTROL About 90 per cent of repair projects are subjected to some degree of quality control: Trial repairs carried out beforehand to check the proposed method On-site checking of repair materials to ensure specifications are met The common site tests practiced by most repairers are visual inspection, acoustic tests, pull-off tests, laboratory tests on cores and in some cases, structural loading tests Special tests to verify the correct functioning of techniques such as chloride removal and cathodic protection. Thickness measurements of applied coatings

  34. Grout Stability Testing 11 grouts tested: All passed the EN447 standard test Only 6 passed the BRITE EURAM test

  35. Performance based repair PERFORMANCE BASED APPROACH

More Related